[scribus] chain frames, "do not" link them

["Christoph Schäfer"]

> Gesendet: Montag, 17. Dezember 2018 um 20:54 Uhr
> Von: "Andrew K" <akroiter at tpg.com.au>
> An: "Scribus User Mailing List" <scribus at lists.scribus.net>
> Betreff: Re: [scribus] chain frames, "do not" link them
>
> I’m not a frequent contributor to the list; however, I read most of what’s written (except stuff about compiling). I will therefore understand if my comments aren’t given much weight.
> 
> However, my understanding in DTP has always been that we link text frames to get text to flow from one frame to the next. I have never heard the term chain used in this context. And piping, in computing terms, is something completely different again. 
> 
> If I encountered the word chain, either in documentation or in a menu, etc, I would be confused. It would cause further delays to my work whilst I went to search what was being talked about.
> 
> That’s my 2.2 cents (in Australia, we have a 10% Goods and Services Tax on everything).
> 
> Andrew
> 
> > On 18 Dec 2018, at 01:19, Gregory Pittman <gpittman at iglou.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On 12/17/18 9:06 AM, Peter Nermander wrote:
> >>> Just testing if one can write/talk about chains without using the word
> >>> link as Owen had wondered:
> >> 
> >> It might work well in English, but maybe not so well in other languages.
> >> For example in Swedish it will probably be harder.
> >> 
> >> While we do have the words "kedja" = chain, and "länk" = link, these are
> >> not always used in the same way.
> >> 
> >> A "kedja" consists of "länkar", but of you say that you "kedjar" something
> >> (as a verb) it more means to use chains to restrain something in place. So
> >> using the word "kedja" as a verb (as chain) might not work.
> >> 
> >> On the other hand maybe we can use "koppla" (connect) instead. That would
> >> work in English too, you would connect frames into a chain of connected
> >> frames? Connect and disconnect instead on link/unlink?
> > 
> > Hi Peter,
> > 
> > I think your point is well taken. The problem I struggle with in all of these (including link, for that matter) is that link, chain, connect in a concrete sense only mean some kind of attachment of one frame to another. The idea we would like to create is that of a streaming or flowing of text from one frame to another. We might even consider it something like the term "pipe", a passing on of material from one frame to the next.
> > 
> > Greg
> > 


Hi all,


I think all of us, including Alessandro, are suffering from the fact that we are speaking different mother tongues, which includes words with different connotations, slightly different semantics, as well as different grammars.


In this particular case Alessandro stumbled across such a case. I have access to German-language versions of InDesign and QuarkXPress, and both use the verb "verketten" or the noun "Verkettung" (literally "chain" as a verb or noun in English, because in English it's easy to convert a noun to a verb) for the linking of text frames, both in the UI and their official German help pages. However, if you look up their English help texts, the companies use "link", with an additional wrinkle by Quark in that they write about "linking frames to create a text chain" or something to that effect.


So I think we are fine with using "link" for linking text frames in the English version(s). What translators make of it is an entirely different matter.


Besides, we also use at least the visuals of a chain in another sense, for instance when it comes to the chain symbols in dialogs to keep aspect ratios.


As far as I'm concerned: No change required.


Christoph